Skip to main content

Full text of "Second Annual Shenandoah Research Symposium--April 1977"

See other formats


Clemson Universi 

3 1604 016 761 381 


National Park 

Second Annual Shenandoah Research Symposium 

April 1977 

r«r - 




KIT! •; . f'rvM 

Natural Resources Report 
Number 15 

U.S. Department of the Interior 
National Park Service 

Massanutten Lodge, Skyland, Shenandoah National Park 

NPS Photo 



21-22 April 1977 

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service 
Natural Resources Report Number 15 • 1978 

As the Nation 's principal oonsewation agency 3 the 
Department of the Inteviov has responsibility for 
most of our nationally owned public lands and natural 
resources . This includes fostering the wisest use 
of OUT land and water resources^ protecting our fish 
and wildlife^ preserving the environmental and 
cultural values of our national parks and historical 
places^ and providing for the enjoyment of life 
through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses 
our energy and mineral resources and works to assure 
that their development is in the best interests of 
all of our people. The Department also has a major 
responsibility for American Indian reservation com- 
munities and for people who live in Island Territories 
under U.S. administration. 

Dr. Charles Funnell, Historian, Valley Forge 
National Historical Park, could not give a 
paper on Valley Forge because of his .serious 
illness at that time. tragically, he died 
ON April 28, 1977. 

to dedicate this publication to him is thus 
appropriate. dr. funnell possessed the 
highest scholarly attributes. only thirty- 
two, he loved to learn, solve research prob- 
lems, and write stylishly. his national 
Park Service colleagues have lost a steady 
friend, his scholarly peers a staunch com- 
panion, and all of us a strong human being. 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2013 with funding from 

LYRASIS IVIembers and Sloan Foundation 


Since 1916, the National Park Service has preserved 
nationally significant natural and historic areas. It has 
supported research so that park development would not result 
in immediate or eventual damage to an area. Today, National 
Park Service research is extensive and broad; it is a tool 
whose precise use improves natural and historic park manage- 
ment . 

This symposium's participants reported on research 
conducted in the Mid-Atlantic Region. The panelists dis- 
cussed projects in natural science, archeology, historical 
architecture, and history. Although individual emphasis 
was on specific studies, their cumulative work underscores 
the variety and extent of their investigations. 

Most of the papers were by non-National Park Service 
individuals. Research done at Shenandoah National Park was 
discussed by professors who have, for the most part, con- 
ducted their projects without federal funding but with the 
permission and approval of the Park Superintendent. Research 
at other parks was done largely by contractors who conducted 
NPS- funded projects. 

Five papers were given by National Park Service em- 
ployees. The one by James Sullivan, Superintendent, Colonial 
National Historical Park, contrasted sharply and interesting- 
ly with the others because it dealt with research from a Park 
Manager's point of view, discussing items of special useful- 
ness to those who might do contract research for the National 
Park Service. 

Shenandoah research exemplifies the National Park 
Service's desire to encourage cooperative research by quali- 
fied individuals. It is hoped that this meeting spurred 
greater interest in cooperative scholarly study in parks, 
regardless of its kind. 

This conference is an outgrowth of Superintendent Robert 
R. Jacobsen's 1976 Research Symposium, which was limited to 
research at Shenandoah. His willingness to expand this meeting's 
spectrum afforded attendees the opportunity to consider a broad 
variety of research in the Mid-Atlantic Region, which, we hope, 
will contribute to a general understanding that the National 
Park Service certainly feels that just "A little learning is 
a dangerous thing." 

Acting Regional Director Benjamin J. Zerbey supported 
this symposium wholeheartedly, as he did the first, and his 
interest is acknowledged gratefully. 



Robert R. Jacobsen 

Shenandoah National Park 

It is a pleasure for me, on this fine spring morning, to 
welcome each of you to this Second Annual Shenandoah National 
Park Research Symposium. 

I have awaited this moment for almost a year to see if we 
could rekindle that special magic which each of us saw and 
felt during our first symposium at Skyland last spring. In 
reviewing our list of distinguished participants and friends 
who are in attendance today, I feel confident that success 
will shine on our venture again. The only difficulty I can 
foresee may be our inability to cover as much ground as we 
have staked out--in only a 2-day period. We will need, there- 
fore, to cooperate fully with our two symposium coordinators 
as they gavel us through our various sessions. 

But why have we gathered together again? The reasons 
are much more important than good fellowship among kindred 
souls. Were I to list three objectives for this meeting, 
they would be as follows: 

1. I remain convinced that too much research is narrow- 
ly focused within its own discipiine--and that a synergistic 
effect can be achieved by sharing information. This was 
exemplified most effectively last year when Dr. Reed of the 
U.S. Geological Survey, who had come to present a paper on 
the relationship of the Blue Ridge Mountains to the theory 
of plate tectonics, said that he could answer the questions 
raised by Dr. Richard Highton, of the University of Maryland, 
who was concerned about the critical rockslide habitat of our 
rare Shenandoah salamander. The effect occurred again as I 
watched Dr. Mike Hoffman (University of Virginia) light up 
while listening to the presentation by Dr. Elwood Fisher 
(Madison College) on plant succession at abandoned homesteads 
within the park. An archeologist had just discovered a new 
source of cultural history information! I feel it is very 


important, therefore, to provide opportunities at this meeting 
today for sharing data sources, methodology, and conclusions 
among researchers who "work on a common territory." 

2. My second objective for this gathering today is to 
acquaint researchers and organizations and institutions with 
research capability with the research and resource management 
needs and opportunities that this park, and other national 
parks in this region, can offer--and to encourage their inquiry 
into these problems. I regret, indeed, that our ability to 
assist in the funding of necessary research is so very limited, 
but I assure you, within this park--as at most others--that we 
will extend ourselves as much as possible in providing opera- 
tional assistance and cooperation. What we lack in financial 
support we hope to make up in encouragement and in the excellence 
of our research and resource opportunities. I anticipate, for 
example, that Dr. Hoffman will tell you again that he has found 
Shenandoah National Park to be a treasure trove of prehistoric 
archeology. Jack Raybourne, State Game Research Biologist, 
can tell us that this is the best place in the Commonwealth of 
Virginia--if not along the Eastern Seaboard--for the study of 
black bears. Elwood Fisher said last year that the park is 
without parallel in the Eastern deciduous hardwood forest 
for studying plant succession--and our intensity of back- 
country use, which far surpasses that of any other area in 
the National Park System, has aroused enough attention and 
interest within the fraternity of backcountry and wilderness 
managers to have encouraged Dr. Ray Leonard of the United States 
Forest Service Research Station in Durham, New Hampshire, to 
enter into a written cooperative agreement with us to help us 
study our backcountry resources and use for consideration 
elsewhere in the country. 

Speaking in terms of this park alone, we need assistance 
from knowledgeable individuals and from the academic community 
in identifying and classifying the park's critical habitats 
and outstanding natural features and communities-- for such 
knowledge is essential in our day-to-day management decisions 
involving both development and visitor use. We need studies 
of our 13 indentifiable forest types to ascertain their sea- 
sonal values and importance to wildlife. We need someone to 
identify and measure such key environmental and social param- 
eters affecting our various wildlife populations as food avail- 
ability, population density, harassment during critical periods, 
etc. We need to know more about forest succession, about the 


historic role of fire in our forest environment — and about the 
effect of fire upon watershed production and upon water quality. 

Often we are unable to wait for research results and must 
make decisions and initiate immediate management actions without 
their benefit. I feel that our track record in such cases has 
been generally good--but I sincerely doubt that a number of the 
visitor use facilities in this park would have been located 
where they are now had we had the advantage of our present 
knowledge 30 years ago. 

3. My third and final objective for this year's seminar 
is that I hope--by this staging and this demonstrated outpouring 
of interest and cooperation--to further dramatize the need for 
greater emphasis by the National Park Service itself on Research 
and Resource Management activities; and I further hope that 
something might be said or be done by someone during these next 
2 days which will inspire our parks, or our regions, or our 
Washington Office to find new words, or new justifications, or 
new ideas which might, through some new process of alchemy, 
turn our enthusiasm and needs into the personnel ceilings and 
gold that are so badly needed in the advancement of research 
and resource management purposes. 

It is a very great honor for me, on behalf of Shenandoah 
National Park, to welcome each of you as friends from the 
academic community, from interested organizations, from 
cooperating state and federal agencies, and from our sister 
parks, and our Regional and Washington Offices of the National 
Park Service to this Second Annual Shenandoah National Park 
Research Symposium. 






Robert R. Jaoobsen 

Superintendent 3 Shenandoah National Park 


Benjamin J. Zerbey 

Acting Regional Director^ Mid-Atlantio Region 


R. Stottlemyev 

Ecologisti Mid-Atlantio Region^ Chairman 



W. Dean Cooking 

Assistant Professor of Biology ^ 

James Madison University y Harrisonburg^ Virginia 



James B. Whelan 

Adjunct Professor^ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service^ 

Virginia Cooperative Wildlife Research Unitj 

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife^ Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute and State University ^ 

Blacksburg^ Virginia 



Gordon Wis singer 

West Virginia University ^ Division of Forestry ^ 
Morgantown^ West Virginia 





Mary E. Baptists Gouveia and James B. Whelan 
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Servioes^ 
Virginia Polyteohnio Institute and State University, 
Blaokburg, Virginia 



J. Heywoodj R. Dolan, and B. Hay den 

Department of Environmental Saienoes, University 

of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 



Ronald R. Keiper 

Department of Biology, Pennsylvania State 

University, Mont Alto, Pennsylvania 



Darwin Lambert 

Environmentalist and Free-Lanoe Writer 

on Conservation and History, 423 Route 2, 

Luray, Virginia 


John L. Cotter 

Regional Archeologist, Mid-Atlantic Region, Chairman 



M. A. Hoffman, Robert Foss, and Robert Vernon 

Department of Anthropology, University of Virginia, 

Charlottesville, Virginia 



William M. Gardner 

Department of Anthropology , Catholio 

University, Washington, D.C. 





{/. Fred Kinsey^ III 

Franklin and Marshall College^ 
Lancas ter^ Pennsy Ivania 



Norman F. Barka 

Department of Anthropology ^ College of 
William and Mary^ Williamsburg ^ Virginia 



D. C. Crozier 

Department of Anthropology y Temple University , 

Philadelphia^ Pennsylvania 





Eduard S. Rutsoh 

Historic Conservation and Interpretation^ Inc. 
17 Van Houten Street, Paterson, New Jersey 


W. James Judge 

Chief 3 Division of Chaco Research, National 
Park Service, P. 0. Box 26176, 
Albuquerque, New Mexico 


Henry J. Magaziner, FAIA 

Regional Historical Architect, 
Mid- Atlantic Region, Chairman 





J. Bruoe Dodd and Chewy Dodd 
P. 0. Box 43 J Lay ton J Neu) Jersey 

archeology assists architecture at fort 

Mchenry national monumentt and historic 

shrine. baltimore. maryland 44 

Edward S. Rutsah 

Historic Conservation and Interpretation^ Inc. 
17 Van Houten Street j Paterson^ New Jersey 



Nicholas L. Gianopulos^ P.E. 

Keast S Hood Co.^ Structural Engineers ^ 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 


Jack E. Boucher 

Supervisor of Photography and Pictorial 
Records, Office of Archaeology and Historic 
Preservation, National Park Service, 
Washington, D. C. 



Hugh C. Miller, AIA 

Cultural Resources Management, 

Washington, D. C. 


Arthur P. Miller 

Assistant to the Regional Director for 
Public Affairs, Mid- Atlantic Region 


John W. Bond 

Chief, Division of Resource Preservation, 
Mid-Atlantic Region, Chairman 





James i?. Sullivan 

Supevintendentj Colonial National Historiaat 

Parkj Yorktown, Virginia 



James Hammond Moore 



Benjamin J. Zerbey^ 

It is gratifying to attend the Second Annual Shenandoah 
Research Symposium. I attended last year's conference, finding 
it most stimulating, and I congratulate Superintendent Jacobsen 
for initiating and continuing this series of symposiums. 

While pleased to welcome National Park Service attendees, 
I am also happy to greet visitors from institutions of higher 
learning, state offices, and the general public. It is you we 
really want to talk to about the role of research in the Nation- 
al Park Service. We hope in particular that you will become 
aware of opportunities for cooperative study in our parks and 
how you may use a park's resources for your research. 

Just as a tree's roots sustain it, so is the National Park 
Service fed by research. That nourishment, moreover, is illus- 
trated by this symposium's agenda, listing as it does papers in 
natural science, archeology, historic architecture, and history. 

Having been employed by the Service for 30 years, about 
one-half of its existence, I can testify to the influence of 
research upon park preservation and use. In Manager assignments 
at Isle Royale National Park, Hopewell Village National Historic 
Site in Pennsylvania, and Minute Man National Historic Park in 
Massachusetts, I used the results of numerous archeological , 
architectural, and historical research projects. In my present 
position, I can never forget the need for research. And if I 
did, our Office of Planning and Resource Preservation would 
remind me. 

Three weeks ago, I visited an archeological project at 
George Washington Birthplace National Monument. The aim there 
was to locate and identify two early 17th-century house sites 
and to secure enough information about them so that a complete 

^Acting Regional Director 

archeological study o£ them could be conducted in the future. 
This was accomplished. Dr. John L. Cotter, our Regional 
Archeologist , the Service's Senior Archeologist , and one of 
today's panel chairmen, supervised the project, and I know he 
will not mind my saying that it greatly impressed me, for it 
made obvious once again the information gaps that need filling 
in every park. 

There are additional reasons for supporting research. 
Today, the rapid expansion of knowledge in all branches of 
learning demands that we keep current in National Park Service 
research. Additionally, expanding national interest in con- 
servation, whether natural or historical, forces the National 
Park Service, even if it did not want to, to conduct research 
that contributes to the resolution of ceaseless management 
problems . 

In the Service, research is a management tool. A research 
project should have a definite objective, one responding to a 
park need. In reaching research objectives, however, we are 
delighted when findings prove valuable to scholars. Our 
obligation to make research findings available is obvious. 
Many research reports are published by the National Park 
Service's Office of Professional Publications in Washington. 
Within a park, artifacts produced by an archeological project 
are preserved according to professional standards. Historical 
research materials used in writing reports are cataloged and 
retained. I might point out that the historical files created 
for Independence National Historical Park have not only served 
park needs but those of numerous scholars. 

It is a great pleasure to welcome you to the symposium. I 
hope you will find the papers stimulating, the discussions in- 
teresting, and the 2 days enjoyable. 


R. Stottlemyer-^ 

The natural and social science program in the Mid-Atlantic 
Region is yet to come of age. Funding ($38,000) transferred 
from Washington 3 years ago remains the base total. One diffi- 
culty, being slowly corrected, has been the justification of 
research projects. Increased demand from WASO to justify pro- 
grammed projects, including research, through approved planning 
documents should help in developing more solid research justi- 
fications. The resource management plan will be used to justi- 
fy and prioritize the natural science research program. 

The attempt has been, in all our research, to improve the 
parks' information bases in disciplines clearly needing addi- 
tional data. 

Dr. Dean Cocking provided .Shenandoah with the objective 
basis for using fire to maintain Big Meadows. This is both 
economically and ecologically more desirable than mowing. Dr. 
James Whalen is examining the existing information on the 
possible ramifications of the current bear management effort at 

Visitor use in the backcountry is one of three significant 
issues facing park management. Mr. Gordon Wissinger has begun 
to examine qualitative aspects of visitor use capacity, and 
Ms. Mary Beth Gouveia has been querying visitors on their know- 
ledge and attitude toward black bears. 

Dr. Robert Dolan's research on the dynamics of barrier 
islands, including Assateague, is an excellent example of the 
benefits of long-term research in changing and adding credi- 
bility to the management of such areas. Dr. Ronald Keiper also 
has used Assateague to conduct basic animal behavior research 
on one of the few undisturbed pony herds left in the United 
States . 

■^Ecologist, National Park Service 


W. Dean Cocking-^ 

Active study of fire ecology within Shenandoah National 
Park was initiated in the spring of 1975 when eight small SO-m^ 
plots were burned under controlled conditions and compared to 
unburned vegetation in similar plant communities. Careful 
analysis of soil, plant, and animal components of the ecosystem 
has led to the conclusion that the use of prescribed burning 
is a suitable alternative management practice to the previously 
used fall mowing treatment for maintaining open space within 
the park. The overall impact of burning on the plant community 
is in fact very similar to that of periodic mowing. Brush 
islands within the vegetation mosaic are killed back to soil 
surface level, but are readily reestablished by root sprouting. 
The herbaceous community similarly is burnt to ground level, 
but a diverse plant cover obliterates visible traces of the 
fire within one month after spring treatment. The success of 
this pilot study encouraged the park management to burn much 
larger tracts within Big Meadows in the spring fire seasons of 
1976 and 1977. The results to date do not alter the original 
conclusion concerning the suitability of the management 

Several differences in individual species responses, how- 
ever, have become evident. Under the previously used mowing 
procedure, black locust {Rohinia pseudoacaaeia) appeared to be 
the major woody increaser species. There was considerable con- 
cern that it eventually would establish stems too thick to be 
mowed and would dominate the plant community. Under prescribed 
burning, it appears that the black locust is kept fairly well 
under control. However, the second shrub species {Rubus spp.), 
the common blackberry, thrives following the spring burn and 
therefore still presents a significant encroachment threat on 

^Department of Biology 
James Madison University 
Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801 

the herbaceous component of the vegetation mosaic. Therefore, 
the present 1977 burn program includes several plots that will 
be stressed repeatedly during the summer in hopes that this 
will deplete nutrient stores in the roots and ultimately shift 
the balance back toward herbaceous vegetation. If this works, 
then an economical management procedure will have been found 
for stablizing open space within Shenandoah National Park. 


James B. Whelan^ 

A method for habitat analysis and evaluation is described 
whereby any forest stand can be analyzed according to the 
structural and functional aspects of the various stand compo- 
nents that significantly influence black bear. 

The major considerations in the approach for evaluating 
habitat potential are: 

(1) Vertical stratification or partitioning of forest 
stand components beginning with soil variables and 
extending upward through the overstory canopy. 
This classification system provides data for a 
matrix analysis to determine the relative impor- 
tance of components, as indicated by the magnitude 
of physiological-behavioral responses of black 

(2) Quantification of important stand variables using 
an inventory system developed for relatively rapid 
estimates of black bear food and cover components. 
These data were used to rank different habitat types 
according to their potential for black bear. 

(3) Relating important stand variables to the energy, 
nutrient, and cover requirements of the black bear 
and expressing these relationships as production 
functions for major habitat types. These functions 
can be used to predict the trend for the Shenandoah 

^U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
Virginia Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit 
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife 
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 
lOOC Cheatham Hall 
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061 

bear population as influenced by habitat changes 
(natural succession, prescribed burning, recreational 
developments, etc.)- 

Preliminary data from the current investigation support 
the feasibility of using the structural- functional approach for 
evaluating forest-wildlife habitat to obtain the type of infor- 
mation needed for making sound management decisions. 




Gordon H. Wissinger^ 

Over the past decade, land management agencies such as the 
National Park Service have been encountering increasing demands 
from clientele and interest groups, resulting in new laws, 
regulations, and policies aimed at satisfying such demands. 
The use preferences, expressed as demands, by overnight back- 
country users at Shenandoah National Park were the focus of 
this study. A theoretical base was developed using various 
aspects of personality, comparison level, privacy and crowding 
theory to determine how such user preferences are developed. 

It was found that most user preferences did intercorrelate 
to produce general use preferences that could apply to a theo- 
retical model of carrying capacity. Backcountry users were 
found to desire low levels of development and appeared to desire 
high levels of intergroup solitude, especially while camping. 
Such use preferences failed to be explained by background 
variables such as general privacy preferences. 

While the backcountry use levels of Shenandoah is consi- 
dered high by many managers, most backpackers did not perceive 
the area as overcrowded (721) or overused (731). It appears 
that a dispersal system, such as the one used at Shenandoah, may 
be a valid approach to providing for user needs while assuring 
minimal amounts of resource deterioration. 

•^West Virginia University 
Division of Forestry 
Morgantown, West Virginia 26 506 


Mary E. Baptiste Gouveia 
James B. Whelan^ 

Because of the rising numbers of visitors and availability 
of picnic and camp foods, Shenandoah National Park has been 
plagued in recent years with increased contact between bears 
and visitors. Reports of damage to visitors' property have 
evoked in park authorities a concern for public safety. Offi- 
cials feel that most visitors are anxious to see bears, but do 
not realize their potential danger. To determine park visitors* 
appreciation of the bear problem, a questionnaire survey of 688 
visitors was taken and the results were analyzed to specify a 
level of public acceptance for noninjurious human-bear inter- 
action, as determined by visitor attitudes regarding the pres- 
ence of black bears. 

The questionnaire included questions on knowledge of bear 
habits and dangers, attitudes toward bear management practices, 
and judgment as measured by reactions to hypothetical encoun- 
ters with bears. General information and demographic questions 
also were included. Questionnair-es were distributed at camp- 
grounds, picnic areas, lodges, trailheads, and backcountry 
permit- issuing locations throughout the park. Sampling was 
done on weekends from August to October 1976. Factor analysis 
procedures were used for data reduction, and mean response 
levels were examined for pertinent information. 

Factors concerned with educational -socioeconomic status, 
visitor welfare, opinions of stringent measures for dangerous 
bears, knowledge and consistent attitudes, effectiveness of 
park literature, and visitor penalties were identified. Of 

^Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences 
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061 

particular importance, the educational-socioeconomic status 
factor indicated that highly educated, city-dwelling people who 
work in prestigious positions are most aware of the dangers 
associated with bears, particularly sows with cubs. By con- 
trast, people who are less educated, work in lower positions, 
and live in rural areas are less likely to realize the danger 
involved. The mean age of the sample was 32.03 and the mean 
education level was 13.79 years. A majority of the sample 
worked in jobs requiring either extensive education or consi- 
derable training and lived in metropolitan areas. High average 
scores on knowledge items suggested that the sample of visitors 
was well-informed about habits and dangers associated with 
bears; low scores for two of the judgment items indicated that 
many visitors were uncertain of the best action to be taken 
when in the vicinity of a bear. Certain attitude items found 
to be correlated with each other were grouped into three clus- 
ters and treated as three single variables called removal, 
conoern, and damage. On a scale of 1 to 4 where a score of 1 
denoted agreement and a score of 4 indicated disagreement, the 
mean response levels for these three variables were: removal, 
2.33; conoern, 1.55; and damage, 3.50. The nearly neutral mean 
response for the removal variable implies that those people 
who do not find bears threatening and do not advocate their 
removal are nearly as prevalent as those who do. The mean 
oonoern score suggests that the average park visitor realizes 
that visitor carelessness is the cause of most problems with 
bears, and therefore believes that the park should assume 
responsibility for both public safety and the well-being of 
bears. The mean response for the damage variable indicates a 
general unwillingness to risk any damage or injury to have the 
opportunity to see bears. 





J. Heywood, R. Dolan, and B. Hayden-^ 

The national seashores contain the most dynamic and vul- 
nerable landscapes of any area administered by the National 
Park Service. In addition to management concerns regarding 
flora, fauna, geology, and public visitation which are common 
to interior parks, the seashores have the added concern of 
rapid geomorphological change caused by coastal storms and in- 
cessant wave activity. The Atlas of Environmental Dynamics is 
designed to summarize the process-response relationship between 
the storm-wave climate and the configuration of barrier islands 
in general, and of Assateague Island specifically. 

The intended audience for the Atlas is the park superin- 
tendent, park planners, and anyone else who may benefit from 
an understanding of the historical processes that have formed 
Assateague Island, and of the current processes that are chang- 
ing the landscape. It is hoped that the information will con- 
tribute to more sound day-to-day management policies, and to 
more enlightened planning for the future. 

There will be five major sections in the Atlas. The first 
section will deal with the geology of barrier islands, includ- 
ing geological history and physical features that define the 

The second section will describe the physical processes 
(wind and water) which cause the changes in the barrier island 
landscapes. Data on the wave climate and storm climate for 
Assateague Island will be presented. 

Department of Environmental Sciences 
University of Virginia 
Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 


The third section will describe how barrier islands 
respond to storm activity. We will present data on shoreline 
erosion for Assateague and will describe the method we have 
developed to obtain this data. The method is based on a grid 
address system which can be applied to the collection of other 
forms of data as well. 

In the fourth section we discuss how the data can be bene- 
ficial in a management context. The last section will contain 
fold-out maps of Assateague that will show historical shoreline 
change, a vulnerability assessment, and projected coastal con- 
figuration in the year 2001. 



Ronald R. Keiper^ 

Since 1975 over 1,500 hours of direct field observation 
have been conducted on the feral ponies that inhabit Assateague 
Island. Despite the fact that these animals live within the 
Assateague Island National Seashore, they lead a relatively 
wild existence, roaming freely about the island and obtaining 
their own food throughout the year. Significant data have 
been collected on three general aspects of pony biology: 
ecology and population dynamics, behavior of individual ani- 
mals, and social organization. 

With respect to population dynamics, the birth rate for 
the Assateague ponies for 1975 and 1976 was approximately 60^ 
while the death rate was about 151 for the same period. The 
sex ratio of the 99 foals born during the course of the study 
was roughly 60% male and 40% female. Births began as early as 
February and continued until October, but most births (651) 
occurred in May. 

Ecologically, the ponies used all six of the different 
kinds of habitats on Assateague Island, although they spent 
most of the time grazing either in the saltmarsh or in the 
dune and inner dune zone. 

Although a number of other animals also live on Assateague 
Island, few interactions occur between them and the ponies. 
One unique relationship exists between the ponies and birds 
called Cattle Egrets. The birds pick insects off the under- 
sides and legs of the ponies and perch on their backs. In 
this example of symbiosis, the birds get more food with less 

■^Department of Biology 
Pennsylvania State University 
Mont Alto, Pennsylvania 17237 


work while the ponies receive relief from the biting flies. 

Mosquitoes and biting flies create serious problems for 
the ponies from June to October. In response to high insect 
population, the ponies exhibit several unusual behavior pat- 
terns that can be considered anti- insect in nature. These 
include wading out into the calm waters bordering the island 
on the western side, "circling" behavior, abnormal amounts of 
rubbing and biting behavior, and "running." 

Data were collected for each month of the year on the 
maintenance behavior of individual ponies, using check sheets 
where various activities were recorded at 1-minute intervals 
for each hour of daylight. Grazing activities occupy the 
major portion of the day, although resting and grooming be- 
havior was always seen. 

By far the most important food plants were Spartina altev- 
ni flora , S. patens, and Ammophila breviligulata. In addition 
to grazing on these grasses, the ponies were observed to feed 
on a variety of other herbaceous plants and to browse on a num- 
ber of woody species. In late winter the shrub Iva fruscens 
forms the bulk of their diet. 

The ponies were observed to drink from a variety of 
sources including permanent waterholes, temporary puddles of 
rainwater, tidal streams, and the waters of Chincoteague Bay 
that form the western boundary of the island. During the sum- 
mer, the animals move to water twice daily, just after sunrise 
and just following sunset. During periods of abundant water, 
no movement to water occurs and the animals take numerous small 
sips from the water puddles found in the marsh. Most heavily 
used sources of water contain about 1-5 ppm of salt. 

The Assateague ponies were organized socially into 17 
different herds ranging in size from 3-16 animals. Most herds 
consisted of a dominant stallion, 2-15 mares, and their off- 
spring. Two herds were composed entirely of young "bachelor" 
males, while several other herds had more than one adult 

Changes in the size and composition of many of the herds 
occurred during the study, but these were due largely to deaths 
and removal of animals by man. Since June 1975, 28 deaths have 
occurred, and over 50 animals have been removed. 

In addition to these changes in herd structure, other 
changes were noted. Fusion of two herds took place when the 
stallion from one herd took over leadership of another. Young 


males were chased from their family herd by the dominant stal- 
lion and these formed an all-male herd. 

The study is continuing in an attempt to obtain a clearer 
picture of the behavior and ecology of these feral animals. 



Darwin Lambert^ 

In 1934, a year before this park became an official entity, 
its 302 square miles along the Virginia Blue Ridge between 
Front Royal and Waynesboro had a resident population of 2,310 
remaining from a larger number that reached its height about 
1900. During two centuries, the forest had been thoroughly 
timbered, most of it several times. Much of the land was 
cleared for farming or grazing. The area also had been exploit- 
ed by mining, hunting, trapping, and tanbark stripping, and it 
had been ravaged by man-caused fires. Now, the mountains and 
hollows are covered by wild forest that is enjoyed by nearly 
three million visitors a year, forest of such quality that in 
1976 Congress designated 125 square miles of it as wilderness. 
The research is intended most fundamentally to discover the 
combination of attitudes, ideas, programs, and events that, 
contrary to the usually inexorable push of civilization to 
intensify exploitation, created a situation allowing nature to 
restore its wild diversity and beauty. 

Letters, pamphlets, newspaper items, magazine articles, 
unpublished accounts by participants, and surviving files of 
the state of Virginia reveal much about the decisive decade of 
eager propaganda, lobbying, campaigning for donations, land 
condemnation, and court tests before title to the land could 
be accepted by the Federal Government in December 1935. Files 
of the National Park Service, though but partially saved, at 
Shenandoah and in the National Archives, furnish endless details 
about administration of the park. The researcher's intermit- 
tent personal contact with the area, with residents being 
evicted, and with the park staff from the mid-1930s to the 
present, and correspondence or interviews with persons involved 
at various periods help interrelate the details and avoid 
omission of meaningful episodes. The park superintendent has 
recently been gathering background facts into a "statement for 

^Luray, Virginia 


management," and the interpretive office is currently gathering 
and arranging historical papers; both projects aid this re- 
searcher's effort. 

The search for facts is little more than half completed, 
and this paper deals mainly with the park's genesis. In tlie 
1920s there was an unusual convergence of seemingly diverse 
factors. Director Stephen Mather of the National Park Service 
and his chief. Secretary of the Interior Hubert Work, felt the 
almost-total absence of national parks in the East to be unfor- 
tunate and unnecessary, and they tried to remedy the lack. The 
South, long quiescent, became eager to "rise again" in an 
economic way; Governor Trinkle was traveling "to sell Virginia 
to Virginians" and thus generate effective "boosterism, " pat- 
terned to some extent after Florida's; and just before Work 
announced appointment of a Southern Appalachian National Park 
Committee a large gathering of business and professional people 
at Harrisonburg had organized Shenandoah Valley, Inc., a re- 
gional chamber of commerce. Many people in Washington, as in 
eastern cities generally, were feeling the tightening pinch of 
urbanization, becoming conscious of a need to "escape," and 
with eyes on the Blue Ridge were organizing the Potomac 
Appalachian Trail Club. George Pollock, who founded an eastern 
"dude ranch" in the 1890's (later called Skyland) on a high 
bench of Stony Man Mountain above Luray, was persuaded by 
friends from Washington that his holdings could and should be- 
come the nucleus of a new national park, and with extraordinary 
drive and public relations genius he plunged into an all-out 
effort to sell Work's committee, and the world if possible, on 
this location. 

The quietly persistent negoti&.ting skill of L. Ferdinand 
Zerkel, Luray realtor, blended the diverse factors into unity, 
and the administrative ability of Col. H. J. Benchoff, head- 
master of Massanutten Academy at Woodstock and president of 
Shenandoah Valley, Inc., made the unity powerful. Additional 
influences and individual leaders joined. The push--though 
confronted by stubborn obstacles such as the resident popula- 
tion, private ownership of the land in thousands of tracts and 
its importance in grazing and other economic enterprises, and 
the competition of other areas in the southern Appalachians- - 
became increasingly potent. Virginia's governor-elect, Harry 
Flood Byrd, already familiar with Pollock and Skyland, hailed 
the park proposal as a great economic opportunity . Virginians 
mobilized to persuade not only Work's committee but also the 
public of the eastern part of the country, the President, and 
the Congress. Soon after taking office. Governor Byrd created 
a new state agency, the Virginia Conservation and Development 
Commission, with Shenandoah Park its number-one project, and 


persuaded the remarkably effective William E. Carson to become 
chairman. He also persuaded the General Assembly to appropri- 
ate a million dollars to help buy needed land. 

Secretary Work, President Collidge, and Congress were 
ready to authorize the park--but unwilling to spend federal 
money to acquire land. Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt, in 
turn, became active supporters and participants, largely 
through the skillful behind-the-scenes work of Carson. Yet, 
despite all this strength and ability, the specter of possible 
defeat hovered over the proposed park through long years of 
struggle. There was opposition from landowners and others. 
Though it never organized tightly enough to become effective 
politically, this opposition brought difficulties and delay, 
especially through court action. But in November 1935 the U.S 
Supreme Court removed the last obstacle by finding the state's 
land-condemnation procedure unquestionably legal. The land, 
though far less than first sought, then came promptly under 
National Park Service protection. The key condition for 
restoration of natural conditions was thus firmly achieved. 
(Details of National Park Service management, of park develop- 
ment, and of the gradual return of wilderness to the mountains 
--though part of this overall history project--are beyond the 
scope of the present paper.) 


John L. Cotter^ 

We shall never cease from exploration 
And the end of all our exploring 
Will be to return to where we started 
And know the place for the first time. 

T. S. Eliot, Little Gidding 

Exploring is the quest which leads visitors to enter any 
National Park Service area. If they had no curiosity about 
what is there, they would not bother to come. Furthermore, 
many visitors make a considerable commitment in money and time 
to visit our areas. They have an investment, and they expect 
to get a return in knowledge and a feeling of having identified 
with the theme of the area they visited. 

Archeology is exploration, discovery. It is analysis of 
what is found and the reporting of new glimpses of the past 
through the medium of reports. Park interpreters bring the 
discoveries to the public. If the interpretation is done skill- 
fully, the visitor shares the thrill of discovery. He has 
found something interesting. What is found is part of his or 
her heritage. 

Archeology is not generated in a vacuum. It is dependent 
upon many disciplines and skills of a special nature to perform 
the quest, make the discovery, and present the news to the pro- 
fessional and lay public: physics, chemistry, natural history, 
ethnography, anthropology, history, folk crafts, sociology, 
phychology, and so on, all factor into the archeological quest. 

Regional Archeologist 
Mid-Atlantic Region 


This symposium has been fortunate in mustering a panel of 
some of the foremost investigators of archeological sites in 
the Mid-Atlantic states. All of the panelists are addressing 
themselves to securing and organizing data for better under- 
standing of the resources in historical and prehistoric evi- 
dence in the parks: Michael Hoffman for Shenandoah, aided by 
the research efforts in Paleo-Indian site evidence in the 
Shenandoah Valley of William Gardner; Fred Kinsey for the 
upper Delaware lands of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation 
Area; Dan Crozier for the Civil War sites at Fredericksburg, 
Edward Rutsch for Valley Forge, in the light of his exhaustive 
investigations into the evidence at Morristown, as well as his 
exploration of the Crater Site at Petersburg; and Norman Barka 
for the extensive discoveries at Yorktown. 

This session is directed toward evoking concepts of modern 
application of research to produce useful data from archeologi- 
cal evidence. These concepts are presented to the scholarly 
community and to the National Park Service for their consider- 
ation and discussion. 



M. A. Hoffman, Robert Foss, and Robert Vernon 

A cultural resources survey of the Shenandoah National 
Park initiated in early 1975 has yielded a hitherto unsuspected 
number of prehistoric archeological sites located in a variety 
of topographic zones. These sites (about 100 in number, 71 
surveyed and 27 reported) span a time range of approximately 
8,000 years, beginning around 6000 B.C. and terminating about 
A.D. 1600. In some instances, well - stratified sites have been 
located and tested, promising a reliable chronological sequence 
for the Piedmont-central Blue Ridge area of Virginia. A survey 
of historical sites and structures in the park conducted pri- 
marily between October 1975 and May 1976 revealed the location 
of 800 pre-park sites through bibliographic and cartographic 
research and suggested the presence between 30 and 40 mid-18th 
to mid-19th century structures, including farmstead, inns, and 
industrial zones. Unfortunately, the documentary evidence is 
so extensive and many of the commonly employed dating tech- 
niques so unreliable that any future analysis of the historic 
settlement of the park area will have to rely heavily on his- 
toric archeology coupled with intensive archival research. 
Studies of the historical demography and ethnohistory of the 
park and its recent inhabitants, when viewed from the perspec- 
tive of long historical time of our multidisciplinary program, 
suggest some interesting revisions of the standard ways in 
which the historic people of the Blue Ridge and their tradi- 
tional culture have been interpreted. 

Recent analysis and quantification of the data from the 
park have focused, due to budgetary limitations, on delineating 
the relationships between prehistory and ecology to produce a 
more accurate explanation of cultural-ecological change and 
adaptation in the Blue Ridge, formulate new research designs 
and directions for future archeological work and, finally, to 
develop an efficient, practical, and reliable sampling procedure 


for prehistoric sites in heavily forested, temperate mountainous 
zones. Because of the lack of preservation of bone and macro- 
floral remains on prehistoric sites, we have been deprived of 
some of our most potentially useful archeological-environmental 
evidence. The lack of a refined chronology has also imposed 
serious limitations on our interpretations, especially since 
we were unable to carry out planned excavations at a stratified 
rockshelter and in the Big Meadows area. Nevertheless, we have 
tried to exploit the available information by viewing prehis- 
toric archeological sites in terms of three levels of analysis: 
Intrasite variability, intersite variability within defined 
topographic zones, and regional site variability within the 
Shenandoah National Park. On the first level of analysis, we 
will consider the evidence gleaned from the detailed "surface 
excavation" of one extensive Archaic site in particular, the 
Blackrock Springs Site and the stratigraphic excavation of 
rockshelter, AU-158. The paucity of structural, occupational, 
and biological remains forced us to rely heavily on artifact 
analysis. In an attempt to establish symstematic classifica- 
tory criteria, a binomial morphological -functional system of 
stone artifact analysis has been employed in quantifying and 
analyzing almost 3,000 artifacts from Blackrock Springs and 
over 18,000 artifacts recovered so far from the park. General- 
izing our level of analysis from the individual site and its 
several different occupations to a subregion, we have divided 
the number of potentially habitable areas in the park into 
eight subregions: (1) hollows; (2) ridges; (3) meadows; (4) 
gaps; (5) peripheral saddles; (6) rockshelters; (7) foothills; 
and (8) mountain slopes. For purposes of relating culture and 
environment, we are regarding each subregion as a sampling 
stratum. Although we relaize that it is likely that prehistoric 
people exploited most of these strata and that they were not 
"independent" from the cultural viewpoint, we have found this 
approach the most useful available to us in exploring the 
possibility of significantly different man-land relationships 
through millennia of prehistory. Each subregion is discussed 
in reference to the possible interrelationships of prehistoric 
settlement patterns and local floral, f aunal , hydraulic, alti- 
tudinal, and palaeo-climactic data. Finally, we present a 
tentative reconstruction of the settlement pattern and site 
frequency for the entire park by establishing a mean site 
frequency for each subregion type and multiplying by the number 
of subregions in the park. A brief account of the assumptions 
and problems involved in our mathematical calculations will be 

Based on the preliminary conclusions reached after 2 years 
of work in the Shenandoah National Park, the region is viewed 
as an example of a temperate mountain forest and suggestions 


offered for future survey in areas of this type. This pragma- 
tic problem of the effect of climate, pedology, and ground 
cover on the location, definition, and excavation of archeolog 
ical sites is raised and discussed in relation to some of the 
recent generalizations proposed by arid zone archeologists . 
Our presentation will conclude with a consideration of the 
interrelationship between archeological method and theory in 
designing an efficient, affordable, and strat istically valid 
technique for locating and sampling sites in zones environmen- 
tally similar to the Shanandoah National Park. 

Finally, it is hoped that our program in the Blue Ridge 
will be incorporated into an areally extensive program of 
archeological and paleo-cultural-ecological research that will 
include the work of Dr. Gardner and his associates in the 
Valley and of Dr. Holland, Dr. Barka, and their associates in 
the Piedmont and Tidewater. Such aereally oriented programs 
already have been initiated in the American Southwest and 
provide the manpower and wide technical expertise needed to 
conduct meaningful multidiscipl inary work on a cooperative 
basis . 



William M, Gardner-'^ 

The Middle Shenandoah Valley is defined as that area from 
the headwaters of the South Fork of the Shenandoah River to the 
junction of the North and South Forks at Front Royal. The area 
lies in the Ridge and Valley Province, with the western borders 
at the Allegheny Front and the eastern borders marked by the 
Blue Ridge system. 

Prehistoric occupation in this portion of the valley 
extends from ca. 10,000 B.C. to approximately A.D. 1500. The 
sequene is continuous in two as yet unconnected segments. The 
first of these covers the Paleo-Indian to terminal Early Archaic, 
or from ca. 10,000-6500 B.C. The second begins just before 6000 
B.C. and runs to the final Indian occupation. 

The ecological backdrop changes considerably through time. 
On a macroscale, at least three major cl imatic-biotic episodes 
have been outlined with many minor as yet unrefined microalter- 
ations. The first of these is the Late Glacial-Early Post Gla- 
cial which corresponds closely with the Paleo-Indian to Early 
Archaic period. The second encompasses the Atlantic climatic 
episode and correlates with the Middle and Late Archaic. The 
third period, the Post-Atlantic, includes the Woodland era. 
Numerous other aspects of the total environment also are impor- 
tant but remain relatively fixed. These include underlying 
lithography, hydrology, litic materials, edaphic factors, etc. 

During the Paleo-Indian to Early Archaic, the following 
environmental variables are seen as important in the settlement 
location choice: The distribution of suitable types of crypto- 
crystalline stone; accessible surface water; tributary junctions 
and other habitat overlaps and the fauna which they were 

•^Department of Anthropology 
Catholic University 
Washington, D.C. 


exploiting; and landscapes that maximized the amount of avail- 
able daily sunlight and minimized wind chill factors. The 
climate at this juncture was somewhat cooler and moister. 
Vegetation was distributed in a mixed mosaic pattern that does 
not necessarily correspond to habitats known today. The domi- 
nant element, wet spruce parkland which grew in the Great 
Valley proper; coniferous forests in the slopes and uplands of 
the narrow valleys; deciduous elements in the flood plains of 
creeks and rivers; and limited arboreal growth in the higher 
slopes and mountain tops. Such a pattern favored the large 
grazing herbivores of the grasslands and reduced, but did not 
extinguish, the more solitary forms such as deer, elk, and 
moose. The climatic trends during this period were toward 
increased warming and drying, with a reduction in grassland 
extent and increase in the coniferous elements. This led to 
wholesale reductions of numerous Late Pleistocene forms and 
their gradual replacement by forest and forest-margin adapted 
forms. The types of sites known during this period are quar- 
ries, quarry reduction stations, quarry-related base camps, 
and isolated point localities. Each has its own specific set 
of environmental correlates, tool kits, and sets of activities 
that were carried out. 

Rapid warming during the Atlantic episode resulted in the 
spread and domination of deciduous forest elements and associ- 
ated plant and animal species. The variety and density of 
riverine resources increased. Biotic resource distribution 
took on the horizontal and vertical zonal patterns evident 
today. Seasonal variation in the availability of resources 
also became marked. The important site prediction parameters 
during the Middle and Late Archaic period adaptations to these 
ecological changes are: Distance from higher order streams; 
availability of surface water for drinking purposes; distri- 
bution of lithic raw material (not restricted now to jaspers, 
cherts, etc.); habitat overlaps; and seasonal availability of 
resources . 

Climatic changes and shifts in adaptive patterns are not 
as well worked out for the later Woodland periods. It is 
evident, however, that the shift in settlement is toward a 
focus of the river ine- flood plain habitats, with periodic 
seasonal forays into other zones. 

By plugging this into a macrophysiographic division of the 
Ridge and Valley Province into the Great Valley, North and South 
Fork valleys, uplands, foothills, and mountains, it is possible 
to predict site location with some degree of accuracy. For 
instance, because of the nature of their adaptive pattern, the 
climatic and vegetation conditions, and the nature of the fauna 


they were exploiting, Paleo- Indian and Early Archaic sites are 
to be expected only in the first three of the above zones. 
Base camps during this period are found near primary outcrops 
of suitable cryptocrystalline stones such as jasper which 
formed along the thrust fault at the zone of contact between 
the Blue Ridge system and the limestones of the valley floor. 
Large hunting camps are found only in zones of habitat overlap 
or in such special habitats as salt licks, which served to 
attract large numbers of fauna despite periodic onslaughts and 
in which escape-potential for these animals was limited. 
Smaller hunting sites are less amenable to prediction but are 
invariably near tributary junctions and on south-facing slopes. 

Middle and Late Archaic sites, on the other hand, can be 
predicted for most of the zones and are distributed according 
to the parameters noted above. As an example, in the flood 
plain the sites of this period are focused on swamps or springs 
in close proximity to the river. In the uplands, they are on 
relatively level areas, near seasonal, wet-weather, or now 
extinct springs and streams and where the terrace gravels from 
the ancestral Shenandoah were available for reduction into 
stone tools. In the area between Front Royal and Luray, this 
is between the 600- and 800-ft contour levels. In the foothill 
zone, except for occasional small chipping clusters, prehis- 
toric sites are absent unless there is a suitable primary out- 
crop such as quartz, quartzite, or silicified sandstone. Moun- 
tain sites are focused again in areas where raw material was 
nearby, e.g., quartz. To be sure, some transportation of raw 
material between zones exists but this would not suffice for 
extended periods of stay, and is probably a pattern more cor- 
rectly associated with the Woodland period when permanent 
villages were beginning to be established in the flood plain. 

This model has been tested to some degree in our work on 
cultural resource reconnaissances for such agencies as the U.S. 
Corps of Engineers in the Verona area of the Middle River, and 
for the U.S. Forest Service in the George Washington National 
Forest, and it has proved to be an invaluable aid. Unfortunate- 
ly, specifics of the model are restricted in applicability 
because of environmental variation. It works for the Middle 
Shenandoah Valley, but not elsewhere. The approach, however, 
and the generalities, e.g., the lithic requirement, the drinking 
water requirement, etc., can be transferred and local and re- 
gional models can be generated. This has been demonstrated by 
us in at least two other areas, the Piedmont and Coastal Plains 
of the upper Potomac and western Chesapeake Bay, and the Blue 
Ridge Province on the New River. This work has been done in 
conjunction with cultural resource reconnaissances. 





W. Fred Kinsey III^ 

The Delaware Water Gap National Recreational Area (DWGNRA) , 
a viable part of the de-authorized Tocks Island Reservoir, is 
a tract of 70,000 acres notable for scenic beauty and impor- 
tant historic and prehistoric cultural resources. When com- 
pleted, the park will extend for 37 miles, from the Water Gap 
to Port Jervic, N.Y. , along the flood plain and adjacent up- 
lands of northeastern Pennsylvania and northwestern New Jersey. 

Since 1964, major archeological work in the valley has 
been done under National Park Service contract by personnel 
from Franklin and Marshall College and Seton Hall University. 
Twelve or more summer sessions of investigation by each of 
these institutions, as well as work by others, have produced 
what is perhaps the most comprehensive cultural -historical 
sequence for any river valley segment in the northeastern 
United States. The Upper Delaware Valley presents an impressive 
data base where heretofore there was a void. Research strate- 
gies involved five interrelated processes: survey; testing; 
deep stratified block excavations; analysis, description, and 
chronology building; interpretation, interrelationships, and 
processual analysis. 

Paleo- Indian components are illustrated by the work of 
American University at the deeply stratified Shawnee-Minisink 
site, with four C-14 dates ranging from 9100 to 7360 B.C. Re- 
lated scattered surface finds come from the flood plain and 
interior site locations along borders of small Pleistocene lake 
terraces. This material is Eastern Clovis with associated 
scrapers, spurred endscrapers, gravers, and biface knife forms. 
Black flint and jasper are the preferred lithnic materials. A 

^Franklin and Marshall College 
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17504 


bogged mastodon, excavated by the PHMC at Marshalls Creek, pro- 
duced two C-14 dates: 10,210 B.C. and 10,070 B.C. 

Early to Late Archaic components are represented by 14 ' 
C-14 dates; 5570-1440 B.C. Archaic components have been found 
in deep stratigraphic sequences at Shawnee-Minisink, Harrys 
Farm, Faucett, Brodhead-Heller , and other sites. Projectiles 
associated with the Early Archaic are Kirk-like, Lecroy-like, 
Kittatinny points, and other small side and corner-notched 
points. Associated lithics are mainly black flint and jasper. 
Tools include scrapers, bifacial knives, utilized flakes, 
choppers, hammerstones , and others. Late Archaic is strongly 
represented, especially at the Faucett site, by pre-Vosburg 
(4200 B.C.), Vosburg (3620 B.C.), Brewerton-like (3230 B.C.), 
and multiple Lackawaxen components of the Piedmont Archaic 
(2610-2180 B.C.). Lackawaxen is the dominant complex of the 
Late Archaic. Projectile points, frequently made of local 
shale, are relatively long, narrow, and thin with narrow stems. 
Settlements show rather dense concentrations of rock-lined 
hearths and lithic workshops. Bifacial knives, netsinkers, 
shoppers, and groundstone tools are but a few of the associated 
artifacts . 

Lake Archaic Broadspear Tradition is represented by Koens- 
Crispin, Lehigh, Perkiomen, and Susquehanna components and is 
dated by six C-14 determinations (1720-1500 B.C.). Community 
settlements are small, compact, and mostly limited to the flood 
plain. These are distinctive and regionalized complexes during 
a time of relatively low population density. Jasper is the 
preferred lithic material for Perkiomen and Lehigh broadspears. 
Large quantities of utilized and nonutilized jasper flakes are 
present at Perkiomen sites. On the basis of stratigraphy, 
seriation, C-14 dating, and typological considerations, it is 
hypothesized that the Fishtail Tradition derives from the pre- 
ceding Broadspear Tradition. Dry Brook and Orient components 
are conspicuous and represented strongly in the Upper Delaware 
Valley. Four C-14 dates place this complex at 1280-810 B.C. 
Sites are numerous and appear to be large, warm-weather fishing 
camps especially noted for their big (40 ft across) rock-lined 
hearths which may be associated with community-wide processing 
of migratory fish. Early cord-marked pottery is found in the 
later Orient components. 

In addition to Orient, several small Meadowood components 
are manifestations of Early Woodland. At the Faucett site 
(750 B.C.) and elsewhere, low feature and artifact density sug- 
gest short-term, warm-weather occupancy. Relationships to 
western New York are apparent. In New Jersey the Rosenkrans 
site (610 B.C.) illustrates Adena influence in the form of many 


Adena-related objects and cremated burials. 

Four C-14 determinations place the Bushkill complex be- 
tween 480 and 100 B.C. and it is strongly represented by an in- 
tensive and extensive occupation at the Faucett site. Features 
include numerous rock-lined hearths, shallow pits, different 
activity areas, and a probable house with a circular configura- 
tion. Artifacts are numerous Rossville and Lagoon-type pro- 
jectile points along with a minor side-notched form, also 
knives, drills, scrapers, netsinkers, choppers, bola stones, 
celts, and many ground stone tools. Varieties of net-marked, 
fabric- impressed, dentate- stamped, and cord-marked ceramics are 
present. Trade-travel connections are indicated by the heavy 
use of argillite, a nonlocal rock. 

Late Woodland components are numerous and widespread 
throughout the valley. Two major complexes Owasco (A.D. 1195- 
1500) and Tribal A.D. 1400) are identified according to ceramic 
styles. Both show close affiliation to proto- Iroquois and 
Iroquois of eastern New York State. Features for these com- 
plexes include deep storage pits and houses. Owasco houses 
are circular, while Tribal affiliated houses have parallel 
sides and rounded ends. Flood-plain sites of the later complex 
are nonnucleated, dispersed, horticultural, kin-related settle- 
ments. Stockades and clan or family-type cemeteries are absent, 
These are base camps, some being occupied year-around; others 
represent spring to fall habitation sites. The pattern is 
identified as historic Munsee or Minisink Indians. 






Norman F. Barka^ 

The Yorktown Pottery Factory (ca. 1720-45), located within 
Colonial National Historical Park, is one of the most signifi- 
cant and complete archeological discoveries pertaining to colo- 
nial American industry yet found. Excavation has revealed a 
well-preserved complex of buildings and features which includes 
two kilns, factory workshops, waster pits, as well as a large 
sample of pottery fragments and kiln furniture. The extensive 
archeological remains represent a well-developed, local pottery 
industry, which must have formed an important segment of the 
Yorktown economy. The evidence further suggests that 18th 
century Southern industry was much more developed than formerly 
had been assumed. 

The lots on which the pottery factory was built belonged 
to William Rogers, an entrepreneur involved in many Yorktown 
activities. It seems most probable that Rogers financed the 
pottery operation. However, the identity of the actual pot- 
ter(s) is not known, although certain ceramics indicate at 
least one potter was of Germanic or Dutch origin. 

Although archeological research is incomplete, the main 
factory complex has been revealed to be a row of interconnected 
workshop-storage buildings and kilns, measuring ca, 190 ft in 
total length and ca. 20 ft in width. The kilns measure 21 x 
10 ft and 12 X 6 ft, respectively. The kilns are similar in 
construction, being made of brick with arches over a main flue. 
The arches supported the floor upon which pots were placed to 
be fired. Both kilns were used for the manufacture of stone- 

•^Department of Anthropology 
College of Williain and Mary 
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 


ware, as both kiln interiors are heavily salt-glazed. However, 
earthenwares may have been fired in the kilns at lower tempera- 
tures. Surprisingly, the kilns resemble tin-glazed earthenware 
kilns of Europe more than they resemble the usual circular 
stoneware- lead glazed earthenware kilns. 

Large quantities and numerous varieties of pottery were 
manufactured at the Yorktown factory by accomplished potters. 
A total of 105 rim shapes have been discerned thus far, al- 
though analysis is far from complete. Salt-glazed stoneware, 
some of the earliest made in North America, includes the fol- 
lowing basic shapes: mugs (four sizes), storage jars, bottles, 
bowls, pipkins, and chamber pots. Specialized kiln furniture, 
including three different saggar sizes, was used in the firing 
of stoneware. Lead-glazed earthenware was manufactured into 
at least 20 kinds of vessels, including mugs, milk pans (16 
different rims), jars, bottles, dishes, slip-decorated platters, 
betty lamps, funnels, bird bottles, stove tiles, etc. Histori- 
cal records suggest that Yorktown pottery was sold not only in 
Tidewater, Virginia, but exported to New England, the West 
Indies, and the Carolinas, probably in ships owned by William 
Rogers . 

The Yorktown Pottery Factory is a truly unique site within 
the National Park System by which to interpret the colonial 
pottery industry. 






D. G. Crozier^ 




Archaeological Record 
Objects /Associations 

Ol Cultural 

(Stobilliotlon ■ ■ Pr 

. Documantory Evidences 
XLiving History Research i 

IHistoric 8 Clhnogropt>iC / 
\ Anology / Inference / 


Environmental Reconstruction 

ENERGY Technology 

Adaptation to Environment 




Demography Economics Community 





^Department of Anthropology 
Temple University 
Broad and Montgomery 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122 


One approach used by archeologists of historical sites in 
assembling an archeological record will be reviewed through 
illustrations of the investigation and stablization of the 
Chancellorsville Inn. An archeological site is the function 
of human Cand animal) behavior and geologic processes; an 
archeological record, therefore, which is used to visually 
preserve portions of our cultural heritage or reconstruct 
patterns of human behavior, must include all available data. 
Such a record will indeed be a sound document of the future. 






Edward S. Rutsch^ 

The purpose of our research project at the Crater, Peters- 
burg National Battlefield, was to discover why the gound sur- 
face was collapsing over the Civil War tunnel dug by Union 
soldiers to undermine the Confederate fort at Petersburg, Va. 
We found that since the war and before the National Park 
Service took over the site in the 1930' s, the original tunnel 
had been re-excavated, enlarged, used as a tourist attraction, 
and subsequently abandoned. Although its entrance to the 
Crater had been sealed, the tunnel still acted as a drain 
through the red Virginia clay, establishing an erosive drainage 
pattern that contributed to the ground's collapse. 

The primary lesson reaffirmed by our project is that 
archeological excavation- -we hand-dug a 17-ft hole--is only 
effective when it is coupled with documentary research into the 
historical record of the resource. Our investigation included 
study of the large body of Union Army documentation of their 
unsuccessful attempt to breach the Confederate earthworks at 
the mined place, as well as accounts of land use and modifica- 
tions of the site since the war as a farm, golf course, and 
visitor attraction. In this last use, the tunnel had been 
re-excavated, enlarged, shored, and equipped with electric 
lights early in the 20th century. 

Historical research into the use of the site by the 
National Park Service was also important and rewarding. Park 
records revealed extensive 1930s WPA work and hints of earlier 
archeological research projects. Park data such as Superinten- 

•^ Historic Conservation S Interpretation, Inc. 
17 Van Houten Street 
Paterson, New Jersey 07 50 5 


tendents' Reports are an often forgotten but very important 
source of land-use information. 

Our work in Morristown National Historical Park, an inven- 
tory of cultural resources within the park, where a similar 
infield and documentary data base exists, resulted in our sug- 
gestion of a cultural resource management plan for park use in 
development, maintenance, and interpretive programs. 



W. James Judge 

The fundamental premise underlying this paper is that 
there need not be a dichotomy between legitimate or soientifio 
archeological research and research in the interest of resource 
management. Researchers should not only be cognizant of man- 
agement needs but should consciously direct the results of their 
research efforts to the solution of management problems. This 
does not mean that managers should dictate the nature of re- 
search designs. It does mean that researchers and managers 
should communicate during planning, data collection, analysis, 
and interpretation so that the relevance to management of the 
research done is both enhanced and communicated. 

The paper outlines a multistage approach to archeological 
research in National Park Service areas which will serve to 
enrich both professional and managerial interests. Since 
National Park Service managers are charged with the responsi- 
bility of very long-term resource management, and since cultural 
properties are nonrenewable resources that disappear if not man- 
aged properly, close cooperation between research and management 
is seen as mandatory. Data from an ongoing National Park Ser- 
vice research project in Chaco Canyon are offered as examples 
of how such a program can be implemented. 

The program begins with a detailed assessment of existing 
knowledge, including a literature search of cultural resources 
in the park area as well as in a larger, regional context. 
Results of this initial effort include a synthesis of local 
data, interpreted in a regional context. The latter is empha- 
sized since management priorities should be established with 
reference to a regional, rather than strictly local, data base. 

••chief. Division of Chaco Research 
National Park Service 
P.O. Box 25176 
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87125 


Also, at this time, immediate managerial needs in terms of 
preservation, protection, etc. , are to be specified. 

The next stage involves a field inventory of the cultural 
resources in the park area. Although 1001 coverage of the area 
is desired and should be attained eventually, the acquisition 
of an estimate through the use of an unbiased sample is possi- 
ble. Sampling methods can be designed accurately and effi- 
ciently through the use of remote-sensing techniques based on 
aerial imagery. Concommitant with the inventory should be an 
investigation of the past environments of the area, based on 
stratigraphic studies attained through limited test excavations. 
The understanding of past environments is essential to the pro- 
per evaluation of the cultural resources. 

Perhaps the most important stage involves evaluating the 
significance of the resources located by the inventory since 
this evaluation is crucial to the definition of long-term 
management needs. In this paper, the concept of three "levels" 
of significance is proposed, along with management-oriented 
categories of significance for the middle level. It should 
be noted that such concepts have not been adopted officially 
by agencies responsible for preservation of historic prop- 
erties. They are offered here to stimulate discussion in an 
effort to relate more closely the assessment of site signifi- 
cance to managerial priorities. The "levels" of resource 
evaluation suggested are exaeiptionally significant , significant , 
and important. Within the significant class, management cate- 
gories include scientific, chronological, interpretive, conser- 
vation, and noncultural . These categories are discussed in 
some detail in the paper, in an attempt to illustrate the im- 
portance of such categories as management tools. 

The final part of the program involves the production of 
resource base maps indicating the location of cultural resources 
by time period as well as by selected environmental settings 
(topographical, vegetative, etc.). Most important is the gen- 
eration of a document, oriented specifically for use by the 
area manager, outlining both long-term and short-range protec- 
tive, preservative, and interpretive needs as determined by 
the inventory and evaluation research. Further, a schedule of 
resource reassessment and ongoing monitoring (e.g., by remote- 
sensing techniques) should be established at this time to 
enable the manager to plan accordingly. 

To summarize, it is felt that a multistage research pro- 
gram such as outlined in this discussion is mandatory for man- 
agers charged with the responsibility of protecting our cultur- 
al resources in perpetuity. I hope that the discussion 


illustrates further that the relevance of such an approach to 
management neither precludes nor detracts from its value as a 
fully professional research endeavor. 


Henry J. Magaziner, FAIA^ 

Thus far, we have been dealing with archeology, through 
which we have learned so much of the past. It is my contention 
that buildings are nothing but the largest archeological arti- 
facts. Clearly, nothing is a better demonstration of a way of 
life than is a building. The building's method of construction 
shows the state of technology at the time it was erected. Its 
symmetry or asymmetry, its massing, its textures, decorations, 
etc., show the taste of the period. Its size and quality of 
construction show the economic situation of its owners. Even 
its alterations tell a story. They show how the building 
evolved to meet new needs. 

From the point of view of the interpretation which the 
public expects of the National Park Service, nothing is inter- 
preted more easily in a park than its key buildings. 

We have assembled here a group of people, each of whom has 
made notable contributions to the preservation, stabilization, 
and restoration of historic buildings. 

John Dodd did a magnificent job for the region in his List 
of Classified Structures. He and his associate, he wife Cherry, 
visited the many hundreds of structures which comprise our 
region's architectural and historical resources. For each 
structure they provided a complete analysis of its architectural 
distinctiveness and its physical condition. Finally, they gave 
us budget figures for needed work. 

Edward Rutsch was the man who, through archeology, discov- 
ered how the surface drainage system at Fort McHenry was de- 
signed. It was through his discovery that we were able to see, 
for the first time, why the Star Fort walls were deteriorating 
so badly. It was because the clever original design had been 

^Historical Architect 
for the Mid-Atlantic Region 
National Park Service 


completely subverted. 

Nicholas Ginaopulos, a nationally prominent structural 
engineer, has worked on some of the National Park Service's 
most historic buildings, including Independence Hall. At 
Hampton, where for decades the great riddles had been, "What 
is really ailing the building?" and "What is keeping the cupola 
up?" he was the first person to make a complete diagnosis of 
the building's structural system and problems. Then he de- 
signed an ingenious system of structural reinforcement that 
leaves the original construction in place, but braces it where 

Jack Boucher is the Chief Photographer for the National 
Park Service's Historic American Buildings Survey. He has been 
photographing historic buildings for the National Park Service 
for 16 years and has recorded over 5,000 structures in 49 states 
and 3 territories. Recently, he was elected a Fellow of the 
world's oldest photographic society, the Royal Photographic 
Society of Great Britain. Time and time again, he has shown 
how photography can be an important architectural tool. 

Hugh Miller was a construction unit commander in the Corps 
of Engineers, stationed in France and Germany. He has worked 
as architect and planner, both in private practice and govern- 
ment. He has worked on restoration of some very notable build- 
ings, including Philadelphia's City Hall, Academy of Music, and 
Independence Hall. For 5 years he served as advisor to park and 
antiquity departments in Jordan, Lebanon, Greece, Turkey and 
Iran. Currently, he is a member of the AIA's National Committee 
on Historic Resources and of the board of the Association for 
Preservation Technology. He is in the office of the Chief 
Historical Architect of the National Park Service. 



John Bruce Dodd and Cherry Dodd 

From 1 October 1975 through the summer of 1976, this sur- 
vey was conducted for all parks m the region. At Gettysburg 
the literally monumental task was performed by staff personnel. 
The List of Classified Structures (LCS) for Shenandoah was com- 
piled by Michael A. Hoffman, University of Virginia; the re- 
maining work throughout the region was performed under a con- 
tract with John Bruce Dodd, Architect. 

The end product of the LCS was one completed form (only 
rarely two or more sheets) for each historic structure owned 
by the National Park Service in the region, documenting name, 
precise location, description (including one photograph), his- 
toric value, condition, recommended treatment, and a budget 
cost for work of any kind that needed to be done relative to 
the structure. Additionally, in this region, the survey 
gathered more detailed information, including complete photo- 
graphic coverage, which was tabulated on additional sheets 
familiarly known as "Henry's forms." 

The objectives of this list were: 

1. To furnish the Congress with an overall statement of 
the problems that face our historic structures, and the prob- 
able costs of researching, preserving, and/or restoring them. 

2. To provide a badly needed reference source for the. use 
of park superintendents, historians, and interpretive personnel, 
and of regional technical specialists, not only listing and 
documenting all structures believed to be of historic or cultur- 
al value but further placing them in a context commensurate with 
their intrinsic value and their mission in the park in which 
they are located. 

^P.O. Box 43 
Layton, New Jersey 07851 


Some factors which contributed to the need for the LGS: 

1. Growth of the National Park Service in recent decades, 
resulting in acquisition of large numbers of historic proper- 

2. Extreme variation in the types, ages, and historic 
values of these properties, further complicated by the vastly 
differing goals of the individual parks. 

3. Increased public interest in the nation's heritage, 
coupled with a much greater appreciation of recent artifacts, 
not previously considered to be of historic significance. 

4. A refreshingly new dedication to conservation of 
resources . 

5. Changes in planning through the years, which have 
altered the significance of the individual structures to the 
parkas interpretive programs. 

Our initial, self-conscious approach, based on unfamiliar- 
ity with the history at each park, was soon replaced by an 
enthusiastic feeling that it was a most relevant endeavor and 
that our fresh eyes were a decided asset to the evaluative 
process. A wide variety of information was for the first time 
discovered, sorted, evaluated, and recorded. It became evident, 
however, that the job would have been done better by a permanent 
regional technician, slowly, methodically, and with continual 
updating over the years. A beginning was made, nevertheless, 
with great help from staff at the parks, to whom we shall ever 
be grateful. The LCS must now be kept up I 

Before starting, we visited 10 of the parks to estimate 
the scope of the work. We arranged for help, contracting with 
an archeologist , a husband and wife team of surveyors primarily 
for Civil War earthworks and roads, a construction estimator, 
specialists in monuments, masonry restoration, and waterfront 
structures, additional typing personnel, and a most cooperative 
photography shop. We preplanned our systems carefully, inclu- 
ding recordkeeping, filing, methods of note-taking, check lists 
for both descriptive details and condition of structures, stand- 
ard abbreviations, and a numbering and designation system for 
photographs. We acquired a Dodge Maxi-van and converted it for 
standing headroom, with facilities for conferences with park 
personnel on the site, typing, filing, storage, eating, and 
resting while in the field. Our 18-ft travel trailer was 
brought out and winterized for use as living quarters. 


The principal initial decision we made was that each struc- 
ture could not be surveyed in the field, written up, cost esti- 
mated, and typed in final form as we progressed with the job. 
This order would have vastly simplified the handling and stor- 
age problem, with entire parks or units being submitted to 
regional for approval and immediate use. We realized, however, 
that it would have produced unbalanced evaluation with ficti- 
tious recommendations and cost estimates and that it was essen- 
tial to gather information, confer with the superintendent and 
his staff, and study the park as a whole in the light of its 
own planning, before making decisions about the individual 
structure. Furthermore, almost invariably, we were working on 
the next park before all the information had been assembled 
from the various sources on the last one'. We tried hard to 
eliminate subjectivity and not to overrate something we found 
especially fascinating. 

Because this is written far from the office, we have no 
record of the number of structures surveyed; the finished work 
is available in Philadelphia. It includes buildings as diverse 
as Hampton, Fort McHenry, Independence Hall, Van Campen Inn, 
Ennis House, and the ASIS CG Station, earthworks from the 
Crater to Drewry's Bluff to the mole-like digs at the Wilder- 
ness; ruins like the ALPO engine houses; historic roads; the 
HOVI races, and so forth. 





Edward S. Rutsch^ 

Because of the extensive water damage to Fort McHenry's 
walls, the National Park Service hired our firm to conduct an 
archeological investigation of the original drainage system of 
the star fort, completed in 1802. Documentary and archeologi- 
cal research revealed that the carefully engineered and suc- 
cessful drainage system of the ramparts had been interfered 
with first by the filling in of the moat during the site's use 
as a military hospital in World War I, then by attempts to re- 
create the moat by superficial landscaping, and finally by WPA 
repointing efforts along the foundation. All these modifica- 
tions had combined to prevent the ramparts from draining prop- 
erly, which resulted in the deterioration of mortar in the 
brick-faced rampart exterior. 

Fort McHenry and its surrounding embankments and batteries 
have a simple but effective surface drainage system. Surface 
runoff from within the fort is removed via brick gutters and 
the postern gate sewer complex. Surface water outside the fort 
runs from embankments and batteries to the center of the dry 
moat and then along it toward drains at the ravelin and bastion 
3. Deep drainage of ground water is provided only for the walls 
or ramparts. Fort McHenry's ramparts are basically two masonry 
walls set into the dense clay of Whetstone Point and containing 
an 1833 infill, designed to improve drainage, of ". , . chips 
of stones laid in with some care, § without mortar; the object 
being to allow the free passage of water to the foundation that 
otherwise would rest against the back of the wall § prevent the 
induration of the mortar--." Water that seeped into the ram- 
parts drained through this infill to the wall's foundations, 
where it exited through the purposely mortarless footing stones 

^Historic Conservation & Interpretation, Inc. 
17 Van Houten Street 
Paterson, New Jersey 07505 


into the moat, which was designed to slope away from the fort's 
walls. Wall seepage thereby joined the surface runoff in the 
moat and drained with it. 

This historic system no longer functions because the dry 
ditch was filled in with debris from the Army hospital con- 
struction on the site in 1919 and the Army Corps of Engineers' 
landscaping endeavors in 1929. The moat was filled with up to 
3 ft of debris and ash and was also surrounded by a new muske- 
try step in 1929 in the Corp's attempt to recreate the former 
moat configuration. The mortarless footing stones, set an inch 
apart to facilitate drainage, were therefore covered over, and, 
combined with the new landscaping, caused the water within the 
walls of the fort to seek new exits through the masonry, has- 
teing its decay. The problem was compounded further when WPA 
workers ditched around the foundations and filled in around 
the footing stones with modern cement in the 1930' s. 

Our conclusions were that the moat, or dry ditch, should 
be returned to its original contour for the sake of historical 
accuracy and drainage. Also, the mortar between the footing 
stones should be removed to allow the free passage of water 
tapped behind the rampart wall. In our research, we reviewed 
and evaluated a vast amount of material about the fort's his- 
toric and more recent drainage systems, including the National 
Park Service's attempts to answer drainage problems. Most of 
these data were found in the archives and Superintendents' 
Reports, and included hundreds of photographs of 20th-century 
excavations. We suggested that a system should be set up where- 
by all maintenance and construction excavations within a Nation- 
al Park Service property should be accurately mapped and re- 
corded, for such records are vital to site analysis. 





Nicholas L. Gianopulos, P.E,-^ 

Hampton Mansion, the late Georgian-style residence of 
Captain Charles Ridgely, was constructed between 1783 and 1790 
on the high terrain north of Baltimore. The large- scaled, 
three-story, stuccoed, stone masonry country house, with cupola 
and dormers that have dominated the locale for years, has con- 
cerned past and present owners with certain structural limita- 
tions that are inherent of the original construction. While 
the primary and obvious concern to owners has been the limber 
wood-framed floors which have contributed to cracking of 
finishes and occupant discomfort, the recent structural inves- 
tigation disclosed that inherent deficiencies of the third- 
floor cupola supports and roof trusses were such that remedial 
repairs were needed there, also. 

The primary response by owners to the limber floors con- 
sisted of shoring the first floor with light steel framing 
from below and the reinforcement of the two longer-spanned, 
second-floor bedrooms with supplemental steel. Whereas the 
first floor and one-third of the second floor had been strength- 
ened, the central hall portion of that floor, with its highly 
ornamented and relatively heavy closet partitions, remained 
unstrengthened. Although the initial primary investigation was 
centered on an evaluation of the unreinforced deficiencies of 
the second floor, the overview approach to the building framing 
disclosed an interrelated behavior between the second-floor 
central hall and the third-floor cupola base supports immedi- 
ately above. 

Determination of the 42 ft high cupola weight and conse- 
quent calculated stresses plus deflections of the third-floor 

^Keast £ Hood Co. 
Structural Engineers 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 


timber beam supports indicated severe overstress and the need 
for supplementary support of the cupola. Similarly, evalua- 
tions of two of four major roof trusses indicated the need for 
development and extension of the proposed attic supplementary 
support system to also relieve those trusses. The new attic 
support system will relieve the existing cupola supports and 
also eliminate the heretofore downward pressures transmitted 
through the partitions to the limber second floor below. 

The unreinforced deflected second-floor areas are to be 
strengthened by the removal of the plaster ceilings below and 
the installation of supplementary steel beams and headers to 
shorten and stiffen the wood floor joists. The new level ceil- 
ings, including the original wood cornices, are to be construct 
ed a few inches lower below their original elevations. 

The logistics and procedure of structural operations rela- 
tive to installing the second- and third-floor reinforcements 
are derivative of procedures developed for strengthening other 
historic buildings for the National Park Service in the recent 



Jack E. Boucher^ 

A picture is worth 10^000 words. The ancient Oriental 
saying coined by the Chinese more than a millennium ago is as 
accurate today as then. The question is, however, just how 
accurate is the story depicted by the picture? 

If it is a painting or drawing, has it been distorted by 
so-called "artistic license?" If it is a photograph, has much 
of the story been lost by poor composition, inferior equipment, 
or the unskilled application of such equipment through poor 

Photography of architectural and engineering structures, 
especially those of historic merit can be recorded by anyone 
with any camera, but it is inevitable that much will be lost 
through an amateur approach to a professional problem. In 
the case of documentary photographs, posterity is the eventual 
loser. If the photographs are to be published, they may fail 
to illustrate and, indeed, may be rejected by a publisher and 
even cause the rejection of an entire paper or article. 

Quality professional photography, using specialized cam- 
eras with a variety of lenses (each of which by itself would 
be worth many times the value of the entire equipment inventory 
of most amateur photographers) in the proper hands, will pro- 
duce razor-sharp images in correct perspective in which the 
most minute structural detail can be examined. The photographer 
will not redesign a structure optically or through poor tech- 

^Supervisor of Photography £ Pictorial Records 
Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 
National Park Service 
Washington, D.C. 


The professional in his laboratory will process photographs 
so as to obtain maximum quality, and any good photograph depends 
on three factors, equally rated, to determine quality: (1) 
ability of the photographer; (2) quality of his equipment; (3) 
photo laboratory technqiue. 

Many a good photograph is ruined in the laboratory, many 
a poor photograph can be rescued in the laboratory .... to 
a point. 

You will be introduced to an assortment of professional 
equipment, and you will see an exhibit that will demonstrate 
the value of professional photography. You will receive some 
hints that will help you make some types of photographs your- 
self with modest equipment. 

As times permits, the presentation will touch upon inter- 
related fields of professional photography including aerial, 
infrared, remote-sensing. X-ray, and photogrammetry , defining 
each briefly, and noting some specific applications of each. 

There will be a question and answer period, and the speaker 
will be available for much of the day to discuss specific 
problems . 



Hugh C. Miller, AIA^ 

The theme is research of resources that are nonrenewable. 
This fact should not be forgotten. Development of basic infor- 
mation through research is essential to the management, preser- 
vation, and interpretation of any resource. 

It is amazing that until recently the National Park Ser- 
vice had no centralized reference that cataloged how many, what 
type, what conditions, or cost for preserving its historic 
structures. The current survey to establish the List of Classi- 
fied Structures (LCS) is the first step in developing a basic 
inventory system. The LCS is conceived as a aontinuously up- 
dated inventory reference for planning, programming, and bud- 
geting purposes. It is an essential reference for top manage- 
ment to develop program priorities and budget justifications to 
the Department, the Office of Management and Budget, and the 
Congress. At regional and park levels, the LCS should provide 
a base for constant review of all the historic structures in 
the unit in terms of program needs for research studies and 
preservation treatments. One spinoff has occurred in this re- 
gion with the use of the LCS Field Inventory Reports to estab- 
lish a maintenance dossier for each structure. This is an 
orderly step in the management of historic structures main- 
tenance and should lead to subsequent programming and comple- 
tion of historic structures preservation guides for each build- 
ing or specific complexes of buildings. 

The use of photography for recording is fully recognized 
as an essential element in development of the inventory base. 
For elevations and details of buildings it is faster and much 
more accurate than the traditional "inch worm" drawing method 
long used by the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) 
Program, We are now designing a systemwide program to establish 

Cultural Resources Management 
Washington Office 


a photographic record base. This program will be beyond the 
scope of the HABS collection because our mission needs for 
architectural records go far beyond those of HABS, whose 
criteria is for documentation of architectural style as a 
service to scholars. Our photo data base will document the 
physical extent, dimensions, materials, and condition of 
National Park Service historic structures. It is essential 
that these programs for collection of basic data be a continu- 
ous process of input that is concurrent with the program cycle. 

The National Park Service long has used research methods 
for the analysis of historic structures. Interdisciplinary 
studies by historians, archeologists , and historical architects 
to synthesize documentation and the physical evidence found in 
the building or its surrounding environment result in the 
historic structures report. These studies are basic decision- 
making tools for the preservation and interpretation of the 
structure. (We are interpreting too little of the architec- 
tural significance and the restoration process in our public 
programs.) These investigations should lead to a full under- 
standing of the characteristic of the historic structure and 
its limitation for possible restoration, interpretation, or 
adaptive reuse. Those latter decisions must be based on the 
suitability and feasibility of the proposed uses and the over- 
riding considerations to preserve the integrity (the complete- 
ness and the honesty of the structure) as a historic artifact. 
The development of the preservation treatment- -preserving in 
entirety, restoration (to remove later parts and replace miss- 
ing parts of a significant period), or reconstruction- -requires 
the collection and evaluation of the information gathered in 
the historic structures report. The timely and complete HSR 
is necessary for the professionals involved in preparing the 
construction documents- -drawings and specification and super- 
vision of the work. Lack of follow- through with contract super- 
vision by persons knowledgeable with the research and the intent 
of the project documents often is the weak link in the whole 
historic structure preservation process. The inclusion of park 
maintenance staff on the work during the preservation treatment 
phase is desirable to provide a continuity of preservation after 
the development funds are expendable. 

Most essential in the research activity is the scheduling 
of the research so that it is accomplished in a timely manner 
to meet the objectives (mission) of the overall program. Too 
often inventories and initial evaluations are not complete when 
master planning decisions are made; archeological or structural 
evaluations have not been started when development conceptual 
plans' are approved. All too often historic structures reports 
are scheduled so that construction funds are used for basic 


history studies rather than to restrict the scope of the history- 
study to the understanding of structure. Furnishing plans some- 
times are completed prior to the development of historic struc- 
tures reports. This often results in drastically changed pro- 
grams of development because the building resources will not 
allow the proposed use or treatment. 

The policy^s standards are clear in their requirements for 
orderly planning and design of research for preservation of 
historic structures. Unfortunately, the programmatic concerns 
and pressures of other motivating forces have often telescoped 
or leap-frogged the essential elements of the research process. 
Only through an interdisciplinary evaluation focused directly 
at the mission objectives to preserve can we expect to develop 
appropriate plans for the treatment and maintenance of our non- 
renewable resources- -the historic structures of the National 
Park Service. This must be done in the development and manage- 
ment processl 


Arthur P. Miller-^ 

Public recognition and support can be gained for archeo- 
logical, historical, and ecological projects undertaken by the 
National Park Service through the Regional Public Affairs 

An archeological excavation, a historic structure renova- 
tion, or a historical research project often can generate a 
newsworthy feature that will be published or broadcast in ex- 
ternal or internal media. Or a news release may trigger a 
reporter's interest and motivate him to cover the story in 
greater depth. 

Public Affairs can advise the park superintendent or the 
National Park Service contractor on the newsworthiness of a 
project, the timing of a release of information to the public, 
photographic potential, and which aspect of a project would 
most interest the general public. The Public Affairs Office 
at regional headquarters is prepared to handle such media 
interest or coverage in a way that will produce an accurate 
report of the project in the press, prevent damage to the re- 
source, and not interfere with day-to-day operations. Such 
public information may pay dividends through demonstration of 
National Park Service achievements, evidence of public support 
and interest, or even through private contributions generated 
by a news report of the project. 

■^Assistant to the Regional Director 
for Public Affairs, 
Mid-Atlantic Region 



John W. Bond^ 

I should like to think that in meetings such as this, 
involving the National Park Service, the academic community, 
and others with special interest, we are working toward the 
better development of an awareness of the resources that are 
in the parks, and through this greater awareness we are better 
interpreting and managing these resources. I see research as 
the very foundation on which this awareness is awakened, de- 
veloped, and maintained. We in the National Park Service 
possess a certain amount of expertise because of our academic 
backgrounds and our professional experiences. But we certainly 
do not pretend to know all about our areas. We have long real- 
ized the interdependence between specialists such as historians, 
archeologists , biologists, etc., in the parks and specialists 
such as yourselves outside the National Park Service. 

Because of the unique nature of the parks included within 
the National Park System- -and they are unique because it was 
their national significance for the most part that caused them 
to be added to the system--we believe there are golden oppor- 
tunities for the advancement of knowledge through the mutual 
cooperation between park staffs and outside researchers. Be- 
cause of the park specialist's intimacy with the resource, he 
is in a favorable position to identify gaps in the knowledge 
of that resource. The academic community, on the other hand, 
might be better equipped to close these gaps through its high 
degree of specialization and the greater opportunity it is 
afforded for applying a broader interdisciplinary approach to 
answering specific questions. All of this is to say that we 
in the National Park Service would like to encourage a broader 
exchange between the Service and the academic community and 
others who are actively involved in the pursuit of knowledge 


Division of Resource Preservation, 
Mid-Atlantic Region 


about resources within the parks we manage. Perhaps through a 
mgre comprehensive identification of our research needs and 
developing a system of making these better known to you, there 
can be a more effective meshing of these needs with your aca- 
demic interests. 

The first person on our panel, as a former historian and 
as a park manager today, knows first-hand of the absolute 
necessity for accurate and complete information necessary for 
the bicentennial development he directed at Yorktown and James- 
town and for the planning of a similar development at Indepen- 
dence National Historical Park. Superintendent James Sullivan 
of Colonial National Historical Park also understands the im- 
portance of knowing the resource in sufficient depth to deter- 
mine where the informational gaps are and how to get them 
filled. His work with Dr. Norman Barka has been a perfect ex- 
ample of the interdependence between the parks and academicians. 

A continuing concern of ours is that we keep up with ad- 
vancement in scholarship as it affects the story we tell in 
the parks and how we manage the resource. One area which has 
received special attention lately is Booker T. Washington 
National Monument near Roanoke. The story is slavery in the 
area where Washington spent his first 9 years needs to be de- 
veloped more fully. Some time ago I spoke with Dr. Oscar 
Williams, Chairman of the Department of History at Virginia 
State College in Petersburg, about this need and he gladly con- 
sented to present a discussion on slavery in the Blue Ridge 
and its relevance to Booker T. Washington. 

Often we have special research needs which cannot be met 
in a timely manner, if at all, through our regular programming 
procedures. One such need was to learn more about the impact 
of the Civil War on the lives of the people who lived in the 
Village of Appomattox Courthouse where General Lee surrendered 
the Army of Northern Virginia to General Grant, and for all 
intents and purposes, ended the Civil War. We were able to 
apply some unexpended regional money to meet this need. Then, 
the park made us aware of Dr. John Moore, who has done exten- 
sive research into the socioeconomic history of Virginia, and 
most recently in his Albevmarle: Jefferson's County^ 1727-1976 . 

A major research project presently underway involves sort- 
ing the myths from the facts as they pertain to our newest park. 
Valley Forge Historical Park. Dr. Charles Funnell, who came 
to work for the National Park Service about 2 years ago, is an 
untiring detective when it comes to historical research. When 
we needed to establish the validity of the claim that Mark 
Byrd's Furnace in Berks County, Pennsylvania, produced cannon 


for the Revolutionary War, we assigned the task to Funnell. 
True to our expectations, he found previously uncited sources 
to substantiate the long-held tradition that Revolutionary 
War cannon were in reality produced by Mark Byrd at his Hopewell 
Furnace . 

The man in our regional setup who plays a decisive role 
in how the information that results from research is translated 
into various forms for the visiting public is Chester Harris, 
the Regional Chief of Interpretation. Harris, a biologist by 
training, before coming to the Mid-Atlantic Region, was in 
charge of the Interpretive Program for the National Capital 
Parks in Washington, D.C. 



James R. Sullivan-^ 

Dr. Sydney Bradford, the Associate Regional Director for 
Professional Services, asked that I speak on the subject of 
Bicentennial historical research at Yorktown. I was both 
pleased and somewhat at a loss to meet with such an august 
group and try to promulgate in 20 minutes all the answers and 
questions, or perhaps it should be questions and answers, re- 
lating to historical research and its impact upon the develop- 
ment program at Yorktown. According to the National Park 
Service's Management Policies Book, we should do the following, 
The National Park Sevvioe shall faithfully preserve the his- 
toric resources entrusted to its care and provide for their 
understanding 3 appreciation and enjoyment through appropriate 
programs of research and interpretation. I shall not attempt 
to go through all of the Acts of the Congress or Executive 
Orders or laws or rules and regulations dealing with historic 
preservation, as I am sure that you will have had a sufficient 
amount of this prior to our session^ 

I am concerned about the programming of research, the 
assignment of historians, archeologists , or historical archi- 
tects to carry out research with sufficient lead time that 
proper managerial decisions can be made and construction pro- 
grams be thought out with care and precision. I wish I could 
report that all of this happened at Colonial in that manner, 
and I suspect that my remarks may apply to Independence National 
Historical Park as well where I served before coming to Yorktown 
We at Colonial operated under a crash program, some of it caused 
by individuals, some caused by the National Park Service as a 
whole, spurred on by its various components. I must say that 
it would have been much simpler if we could have gone about 
this entire task in a very methodical and thoughtful process. 

Colonial National Historical Park 
Yorktown, Virginia 


Hindsight always has the advantage over foresight. I would 
hope that future efforts toward research for programs of the 
magnitude of the Bicentennial, and I would even suspect going 
back to 1960-65 for the Civil War Centennial, would be pro- 
grammed in a timely and organized way to meet our obligations 
as a preservation agency. 

We have just completed a multimillion dollar expansion 
program at Colonial. This included many projects of a widely 
diverse nature, from restoring fortifications to preparing 
scripts for audio stations. It entailed a vast amount of use 
of data about the park's resources. Fortunately, this was not 
the first such commemoration and a significant amount of infor- 
mation was on hand. However, despite a carefully devised plan- 
ning procedure, much of the data generated by the National Park 
Service's multidisciplined research approach was too late to 
be of use as a management tool. And unlike so much of the 
historical research field, the National Park Service research 
in history is very project-oriented. This meant that many 
projects had to be completed before a reasonable percentage 
of their information was available, and this is not the first 
time that we have experienced this sort of dilemma. Why did 
we have this problem at Colonial? We believe, first, because 
we did not have the depth and specific knowledge available in 
the form of skilled historians. In our case we lost an ex- 
perienced employee at a critical time. The individuals who 
were recruited to fill in, fortunately, proved to be extremely 
dedicated and capable. However, their backgrounds were far 
different academically from the material with which they would 
work. There is no reflection upon the individuals involved, 
but valuable time was lost. This was never to be made up 
insofar as providing material for management decisions. 

How could this problem have been resolved. First, the 
research should have been defined into a distinctive, logical, 
controllable module. This would then have been placed under 
the direct supervision of a single on-site research coordinator, 
This individual would have authority over all disciplines. He 
or she also would have controlled scheduling, fiscal alloca- 
tions, and personnel actions. This person would answer only 
to a highly placed development supervisor. He or she would be 
responsible for using all available local resources (i.e., 
local scholars and collections and local National Park Service 
expertise) . This individual would be responsible for maintain- 
ing a rigid interlock of disciplines to assure maximum use of 
resources and minimum overlap. Where possible, work would be 
contracted with rigid time frames. The unit would be inviolate 
until its mission was complete. Responsibilities would be 
pinpointed and those who did not meet them would be weeded out. 


This sounds authoritarian and unacademic, but if we are to 
do the best in the field of preservation and meet our obliga- 
tions to the taxpayer we must adopt stern measures. 






John Hammond Moore 

Momentous as events of 9 April 1865 were, only by accident 
did Lee and Grant end up in the living room of Wilmer McLean, 
the man who fled from northern Virginia to escape the ravages 
of war. When Lee evacuated the Richmond-Petersburg area a week 
earlier, he headed for Danville; but, harrassed by Union forces, 
he and his men veered northward and Lynchburg became a susti- 
tute goal . 

Late on Saturday afternoon, 8 April, Confederates reached 
the vicinity of Appomattox Court House. An attempt to obtain 
badly needed food and supplies at the railway station 2 miles 
away was thwarted by the enemy. During the night, it became 
obvious that northern cavalry blocked the route west. An early 
morning feint got nowhere. The only course possible was sur- 

The setting for this drama was a tiny agricultural village 
of perhaps 30 houses and a very new county seat by Virginia 
standards, only 20 years old. It was a relatively isolated 
community, at least well insulated from the strife of war. Yet 
Appomattox Court House was close by a rail line which functioned 
throughout the entire conflict and only a dozen miles from the 
James River Canal . 

These facts - -east-west rail and water connections and rela- 
tive isolation- -help to explain why the Civil War had limited 
impact upon this center of county government. Anything a Rich- 
mond, Petersburg, or Lynchburg merchant had on his shelves could 
be delivered at the rail depot within a day or so--that is, if 
one was willing to pay inflated wartime prices. 


No battles, save for the final skirmishes which hardly 
rate that name, were fought in the region, and one must ques- 
tion traditional tales of food and fodder shortages in the 
immediate vicinity. Southern Claims Commission records (1871- 
80) and diaries penned by southern deserters indicate the 
opposite was true. 

It would appear that, long before April 1865, most resi- 
dents concluded the Lost Cause was indeed lost. Why contribute 
more goods and money to a doomed dream? Thus it seems that 
Appomattox Court House, like most Virginia towns and villages 
not in the path of armies, was barely touched by war. This is 
not to overlook the departure of scores of sons who marched 
away, never to return, yet this was a tragedy experienced by 
communities both North and South. 

But by 8 April the village was in the path of not one, 
but two armies, and for a week or so the fact of surrender had 
profound effects. Thousands of men encamped nearby. Horses, 
cattle, mules, supply wagons, guns, all sorts of war machinery 
littered the hills of this pleasant rolling countryside. That, 
however, is a post-capitulation phenomenon, a very unique sit- 
uation which lasted for only a brief time. Nevertheless, the 
decision reached in McLean's living room had profound impact 
upon Appomattox, Virginia, the South, and the nation, far 
greater than the agony of the Civil War itself.